This art of poetry and rhetoric by Gracian was, in the seventeenth century, the only work of the kind which produced any influence on the taste of writers and the public.
Gongorism peeps forth even in the published letters of the eminent men of this period, which exhibit a strained formality and an affected elegance. The letters of Quevedo form in this respect no exception. Even in those of Antonio de Solis the facility of the true epistolatory style is wanting.569
BOOK III.
HISTORY OF SPANISH LITERATURE FROM ITS DECLINE IN THE LATTER HALF OF THE SEVENTEENTH TO THE END OF THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY.
This book is intended to be only a compendious supplement to the two preceding books of the History of Spanish Poetry and Eloquence. Were it even an agreeable task to describe in detail through what gradations a nation rich in intellect, which unfortunately descended from the most brilliant height of literary independence, to the servile imitation of foreign forms, passed in this lamentable decline, until the depressed national spirit began with patriotic feeling again to arise, and slowly to re-animate the native literature—it still would be proper to leave that office to the writer whose object it may be to give an account of every production which appears within the circle of polite learning. From him, however, who has rather chosen to take a general historical view of the developement and progress of literary genius and taste in modern Europe, it would be unreasonable to expect specific notices of inferior works, published during the period of an expiring and slowly reviving literature. In the eighteenth century, no poet arose in Spain to form an epoch such as that finally marked in Italian literature by Metastasio; and whatever was then accomplished in Spanish prose, was a consequence of the imitation of French models.
It is scarcely necessary to observe, that according to the laws of nature and the human mind, no distinct line of separation can exist between this period and that which precedes it. When lights are gradually and imperceptibly extinguished, it is impossible to name the moment when obscurity commenced. It would be no less difficult to fix precisely the epoch of the revival of Spanish literature, for it is marked by no particular phenomenon. The necessary division in the history of the progressive and retrogressive state of Spanish literature must therefore be referred, without any precise determination, to the reign of Charles II. from 1665 to 1700. Some dramatic authors who maintained the respectability of the Spanish national theatre, to the beginning of the eighteenth century, will consequently be included in this last book. Thus the account of the new dawn of national genius, promising better times, will be given in connexion with the immediately preceding literary transactions.
This book may be conveniently divided into three chapters. The first will contain the history of the complete decay of the Spanish national spirit in respect to literature. In the second will be given a brief account of whatever literary events appear to deserve consideration from the reign of Charles II. to the commencement of the reign of Charles III. The third chapter will be devoted to a summary notice of the more recent occurrences, which particularly in the last ten years of the eighteenth century appear to have given a new direction to Spanish literature.
CHAP. I.
GENERAL VIEW OF THE STATE OF POETICAL AND RHETORICAL CULTIVATION IN SPAIN DURING THIS PERIOD.
Within the century composed of the reigns of the three Philips, from 1556 to 1665, that is to say, the golden age of Spanish literature, the national spirit, which the vicious system of the government was calculated to repress, became at last like the national resources, completely exhausted. Under Charles II. the wounds of the body politic which had long profusely bled, began to exhibit frightful gangrenes. In every quarter of the world Spanish valour had done its uttermost for the support of the perverse measures of a despotic government, and the state at length seemed on the verge of dissolution. The enormous treasures which poured into Spain from the mines of America, were immediately consigned to foreign nations. Thus the richest country in the world was overwhelmed with debt. Agriculture and industry languished particularly in the interior of the monarchy, where a near view of the splendour of an ostentatious court still served to gratify Castilian vanity, but where every blow levelled against the whole state was most directly felt. The occupation of one half of America carried off men from the mother country by thousands at a time; and in addition to this drain, the population had been suddenly diminished to the extent of nearly half a million, by the tyrannical expulsion of the Moriscos, or baptized Arabs. Spain was also engaged in uninterrupted warfare during the whole of the century in which the three Philips reigned. Continual levies of troops, combined with oppressive taxation, at length so reduced the nation, that the government lost the instrument it had abused; and every sacrifice made to meet cases of imperious urgency, served only to produce a new humiliation. The little kingdom of Portugal, by a fortunate effort threw off the Spanish yoke, and became once more an independent state. Torrents of Spanish blood were shed in the Netherlands, with the view of suppressing, at any price, the freedom of the United Provinces; yet those provinces flourished in full vigour, while Spain was reduced to the last stage of political inanition. Still, however, Spanish genius appeared to soar superior to all the evils that assailed the state, as long, at least, as the semblance of the ancient national greatness remained. But with the death of Philip IV. even that semblance vanished. The widowed queen, who was appointed guardian of the young king, then only five years of age, acting under the influence of father Neidhart, a German Jesuit, offered the last insult to the feelings of the nobility and the people. No sooner was father Neidhart driven away by the party of Don John of Austria, the natural son of Philip IV. than France obtained possession of a considerable portion of the provinces which Spain still held in the Netherlands. In the West Indies a republic of pirates was established. This new enemy grew out of the remarkable association of the Flibustiers, or Buccaneers, men who regarded Spanish America as a booty on which they were entitled to prey. This state of things was not improved when the full powers of government were placed in the hands of the weak Charles II. the period of whose reign is the most melancholy in Spanish history.
The circumstance of a French prince being called to the Spanish throne, in obedience to that will of Charles II. which has been so much censured, was by no means unfortunate for Spain, either in a literary or political point of view. The war, which was partly a civil contest, and which was maintained for twelve years before the new Philip, the fifth of that name, was tranquilly seated on his throne, seemed, however, to threaten the annihilation of the last remnant of Spanish national vigour. The mild and rigidly pious Philip V. was, by his personal character and mode of thinking, previously related to the nation to which he now belonged. He manifested no desire to transplant into Spain the literature of France, which at that time began to exercise an influence over the whole of Europe. The foreigners whose promotion to important posts during the reign of the first Bourbon in Spain, rendered them the objects of much patriotic jealousy, were Italians and Irishmen, but in no instance Frenchmen. The French influence operated in Spain, only on the wavering politics of the cabinet of Madrid; the change of the reigning dynasty produced therefore little or no influence on Spanish literature. All that Philip V. did to promote the advancement of learning on the French model, was wholly confined to the celebrated institution of royal academies, among which the academy of history, and still more, the academy of the Spanish language and polite literature,570 may be regarded as having operated influentially on the literature of Spain. But this last-mentioned academy, which was established in the year 1714, was never intended for the annihilation of the spirit and peculiar forms of Spanish poetry and eloquence. The cultivation of the Spanish language was its especial care, and its labours for the accomplishment of that object were crowned by the production of its excellent dictionary. The efforts made by some members of this academy to form the taste of their countrymen on the model of that of France, must be attributed to themselves individually. They merely followed the new current of French taste, in common with almost every person in Europe, who had then any pretensions to polite education. If these innovators must be called a literary court party, the term can only be employed in the sense in which it would, with equal propriety, apply to the same sort of party existing in other countries, where the French style became the fashionable style of courts, and was, with courtier-like complaisance, generally adopted by authors both in verse and in prose.
The French taste spontaneously penetrated into Spanish literature when the age of Louis XIV. began to exercise an imposing influence over the whole world. But the French taste would have operated on the literature of Spain, which had already been carried so far beyond that of France, in a very different manner, had not the old national energy been crippled in every direction. Had it not been for this unfortunate circumstance crowds of servile imitators and pseudo critics would never have obtained a footing in Spain. Men of rightly cultivated understanding would have reconciled their purer taste to the yet unexhausted national genius, in order to enhance the advantages of Spanish literature in its competition with the literature of France, and to learn true elegance from the French, without, like them, sacrificing to mere elegance beauties of a higher order. But the age of vigour was past; and yet feeble pride would in no respect renounce its pretensions. Two parties now arose in the polite literature of Spain. The leading and would-be elegant party, included persons of rank and fashion, who had begun to be ashamed of the ancient national literature, and who yet wished to prove that that national literature, even when estimated according to the rules of French criticism, possessed many beauties. That the French might no longer boast of superior taste, this party sought to improve Spanish poetry, and particularly the Spanish drama, by translations of French works and imitations of the French style. To this party of fashionable innovators was opposed the old national party, composed of persons distinguished for their obstinate attachment to the ancient taste, and even to the ancient rudeness. This party continued, as heretofore, to be that of the Spanish public; but it remained for a time without any literary representative. Thus was it reduced to the necessity of seeing writers, who laid claim to the title of Spanish patriots, publicly attack its old favourites, particularly Lope de Vega and Calderon, while no zealous pen took up their public defence. Nevertheless this party continued unshaken in its opinions. Even during the extreme crisis of the conflict between the French and the national taste, about the middle of the eighteenth century, the Spanish theatre preserved its own peculiar forms. It assumed, however, a character no less varied than the German theatre at present exhibits. Plays in the national style were performed on the Spanish stage alternately with translations and imitations of French and even of English dramas; and if this heterogeneous variety did not degenerate into the monstrous, as it now does on the German stage, where a national style never prevailed, yet nothing could be more inconsistent than the contrast formed by plays in the French and English taste with the old Spanish comedies. But these comedies, and in general all the old national poetry, once more obtained spirited defenders among Spanish critics and authors, after the shock of the last crisis had been withstood by the ancient taste in its conflict with the modern. Thus another literary triumph was gained by the tenacity of the Spanish public, to which, in matters of taste, monarchs otherwise despotic, readily granted perfect freedom.
The mixture of national and foreign taste in the modern literature of Spain, was promoted in no slight degree by the introduction of French manners, which had at this period spread over Europe, but which were in Spain less encouraged by court example than in other countries. At the court of Madrid, old Spanish formality was still preserved; and among the nobility, as well as the people, the national costume was only gradually superseded by the French style of dress. Bull fights continued to be the favourite amusements of the Spaniards from the highest to the lowest ranks. But the solemn Autos de Fe,571 in which the inquisition appeared in all the splendour of its power, and in which heretics were burnt amidst the approving shouts of the spectators, no longer insulted humanity. The last of these horrible festivals of fanaticism was performed with extraordinary pomp at Madrid in the year 1680, in compliance with the pious wish of King Charles II. The Bourbons who succeeded to the Spanish throne, whatever might be the ardour of their catholic zeal, appeared to regard such barbarous spectacles with disgust, and thus set an example of refinement which honourably marked their relationship to the French royal family. At this period, too, when the storm of the reformation had subsided, religion as well as manners assumed a milder character throughout all Europe. The Spaniards, however, could not be induced to renounce their sacred comedies, until in the year 1765 they were formally prohibited by a royal decree, because they excited the derision of foreigners.
Finally, in the second half of the eighteenth century, scientific learning gained an ascendancy over polite literature in Spain, as in every other part of Europe. A philosophy in the sense of the French encyclopædists inflicted wounds equally mortal on fanaticism and poetic enthusiasm. The spirit of experiment which sought by an accumulation of facts to scan the furthest depths of human knowledge and the principles of all science, and styled that accumulation sound philosophy, had, since the time of the French encyclopædists, found favour in Spain, as in every part of Europe, Germany excepted. True poetry, to which this spirit of experiment is the most dangerous of all enemies, could not easily revive in its former magnificence. But a wider field of general utility was, under certain restrictions, opened to elegant prose; and criticism at least obtained the negative advantage of being able to impede any new encroachments of ingenious extravagance.
CHAP. II.
DECAY OF THE OLD SPANISH POETRY AND ELOQUENCE, AND INTRODUCTION OF THE FRENCH STYLE INTO SPANISH LITERATURE.
The last branch of Spanish national poetry still flourished in the reign of Charles II. The French drama, which then appeared in the first dawn of its celebrity, had as yet no influence on the drama of Spain. Several assiduous writers continued to enrich Spanish literature with new pieces in the manner of Calderon; and these writers have here the first claim to consideration.
CANDAMO, ZAMORA, AND CAÑIZARES, DRAMATISTS IN THE OLD NATIONAL STYLE.
Towards the close of the seventeenth century, the dramas of Francisco Bancas Cándamo, were particularly esteemed. Cándamo, who was an Asturian of noble extraction, received, during a certain period, a pension from Charles II. for writing for the court theatre at Madrid. He, however, died in indigence in the year 1709. His historical play, entitled, El Esclavo en Grillos de Oro, (the Slave in Golden Fetters), is still spoken of in terms of approbation in Spain.572 It is a romantic anecdote taken from the history of the Emperor Trajan. The singular combination of the ancient and the romantic costume which this play presents, is a fault with which the author must not be reproached; for since Lope de Vega’s time the spirit of the Spanish drama required that the events of ancient history should be arrayed only in the garb of romance. But Cándamo has put into the mouth of the Emperor Trajan, a superabundance of phrases which are exceedingly dull, though conveyed in light and harmonious verse. The purely romantic scenes in which ladies and young knights appear, are the best in this drama, which, according to the Spanish classification is a heroic comedy.
Antonio de Zamora, a gentleman belonging to the court of Madrid, was particularly distinguished as a writer of comic dramas. The comedy, entitled, El Hechizado por Fuerza, (the Bewitched by Force),573 is one of the most humorous and regular in the Spanish language. It may also be numbered among the dramas of character; at least the two principal parts, though a little overcharged, are nevertheless boldly conceived and consistently maintained. One is a fantastic old man, who continually expresses himself in a tone of sarcastic comic humour:—he makes a parade of his odd fancies, as if they were so many proofs of real wisdom; and he is induced to consent to a marriage under the idea that he is bewitched. The other comic character is an enamoured physician, who is prevailed on to take a part in the pretended bewitching, and who on his part is also outwitted by the sprightly girls whom he has assisted in playing off their trick on the old man.
Joseph de Cañizares, who likewise lived at the court of Madrid, produced a considerable number of Spanish comedies. He particularly devoted his attention to that class of dramas of intrigue, called comedias de figuròn, in which the principal character is a pretender or braggadocio, either male or female, who by dint of impudence and artifice, obtains a certain degree of credit. Among the dramas of Cañizares, the Spaniards particularly esteem his comedy, entitled, El Domine Lucas;574 it is a drama of character, comic throughout, and of the most regular description, though it by no means departs from the Spanish national style. The title may be translated “The Pedant Squire;” for Domine Lucas, the hero of the piece, is a young country gentleman, a student of Salamanca, extremely dull and affected, and withal proud of his noble birth. With this character is very happily combined the uncle of Lucas, a brave, amiable, and sensible old gentleman; though, like his nephew, he interlards his discourse with scraps of latin from the Corpus Juris. An old domestic, who likewise has resource to latin whenever his wit fails him, is well grouped with his master’s. An excellent female pendant to the doltish hero is exhibited in the character of one of the daughters of the old uncle, who in the end is united to Lucas, while her sprightly sister, to whom the Domine was betrothed, elopes with a more agreeable lover. The traits of character in the whole of this comic picture, though by no means delicately sketched, are, nevertheless, full of dramatic spirit.
These, and other plays, by writers whose names are not in any other respect distinguished, complete the national treasure of the Spanish drama. The striking regularity which distinguishes some pieces, must by no means be attributed to the influence of French taste. It is possible that a vague idea of the regularity of the French comedy may at this time have penetrated into Spain; but among the older Spanish dramas, particularly those of Solis and Moreto, some are no less regular than the comedies of character written by Zamora and Cañizares; who, besides, did not always, any more than their predecessors, confine themselves rigidly within the bounds of regularity. In the works of these latter poets, the theatrical personages are precisely of the same cast as in the writings of the older dramatists. Young officers, who are usually represented as giddy lovers, boast of their adventures in Flanders, and sing romances to the accompaniment of the guitar. This part is the prototype of that which on the French stage was subsequently called the Chevalier. No trace of the imitation of French manners is perceptible; and, if here and there a French word is introduced, it is always with a comic signification.575
DOÑA JUANA INEZ DE LA CRUZ.
Nothing poetical produced at this period, or at least nothing sung and written in the lyric or other styles of poetry in Spain, obtained literary celebrity. It would, however, be unjust to pass over in silence some works which made their appearance about this time, and which are interesting, inasmuch as they afford instances of the continuation of the taste for old Spanish poetry. Among these, the most remarkable are the numerous productions of a Spanish American poetess, named Doña Juana Inez de la Cruz, who was much celebrated in Mexico about the latter end of the seventeenth century. On the title-page of her works, which, however, she did not publish herself, this distinguished woman is styled the tenth muse.576 Respecting the history of her life, nothing is known, save what is mentioned in her poems. She was a nun in a Mexican convent; and she complains of her weak state of health in the verses which form the preface to her poems. Her writings sufficiently prove that she lived on terms of intimacy with the viceroy and the other Spanish grandees in Mexico, and that frequent demands were made upon her talent for the celebration of festivals, both spiritual and temporal. Much as Inez de la Cruz was deficient in real cultivation, her productions are eminently superior to the ordinary standard of female poetry. Of all the Spanish ladies who have turned their attention to poetry, she deserves to rank the highest; though, perhaps, this station may not be deemed very honourable, as Spanish women have so little distinguished themselves in poetry. But for this very reason it seems the more worthy of recollection, that under the sky of America, flowers of genius were permitted to bloom, which in Spain would in all probability have been blighted in the bud. The poems of Inez de la Cruz, moreover, breathe a sort of masculine spirit. This ingenious nun possessed more fancy and wit than sentimental enthusiasm; and whenever she began to invent, her creations were on a bold and great scale. Her poems are of very unequal merit; and are all deficient in critical cultivation. But in facility of invention and versification, Inez de la Cruz was not inferior to Lope de Vega; and yet she by no means courted literary fame. The complete collection of her poems, which seems to have been first printed by order of the Vice-Queen of Mexico, occupies a volume, consisting of twenty-five sheets in octavo. Of some of her sonnets the subjects are ingenious plays of romantic wit;577 of others, serious poetic reflections.578 She also wrote burlesque sonnets on rhymed endings, which, though sometimes deficient in delicacy, have all the freedom and sprightliness that can be required in that species of composition. A kind of poetic self-deception, which assumes the tone of philosophic reasoning, is disclosed in several of the lyric romances of Inez de la Cruz. She evidently took considerable pains to persuade herself that she was happy.579 A great portion of her poems in the romance style, relate to circumstances of temporary interest. In her dramatic works, the vigour of her imagination is particularly conspicuous. The collection of her poems contains no comedies, properly so called, but it comprises a series of boldly conceived preludes, (loas), full of allegorical invention; and it concludes with a long allegorical auto, which is superior to any of the similar productions of Lope de Vega. It is entitled, El Divino Narciso, a name by which the authoress designates the heavenly Bridegroom. The Spanish public had never before witnessed so bold a travesty of the ideas of catholic christianity, under the garb of the Greek mythology. It would be impossible to give a brief, and at the same time intelligible sketch of this extraordinary drama. With regard to composition it is quite monstrous; in some respects offending by its bad taste, and in others charming by its boldness. Many of the scenes are so beautifully and romantically constructed, that the reader is compelled to render homage to the genius of the poetess; while at the same time he cannot but regret the pitch of extravagance to which ideas really poetic are carried. There is one peculiarly fine scene in which human nature, in the shape of a nymph, seeks her beloved, the real Narcissus, or the christian Saviour. The imagination of the authoress had, doubtless, been influenced by impressions received from the Song of Solomon.580 Next to this grand Auto, the spiritual canciones in the old Spanish style, and some cantatas deserve to be distinguished among the works of Inez de la Cruz. They abound in sentimental fancies, which, though generally extravagant, often possess beauties which render them highly interesting; and according to the notices in the collection, they were all sung in the churches of Mexico. Some latin compositions of the same class are inserted, which seem also to have been written by Inez herself. The writer who may undertake a history of the poetic developement of the catholic faith, will find his advantage in rendering himself intimately acquainted with these poems.
GERARDO LOBO.
In order to be satisfied that Spanish poetry inclined very little to the French, in the early part of the eighteenth century, it is only necessary to advert to the continued influence of Gongorism at that period, as exemplified in poetic productions, which are in other respects too unimportant to claim any notice. Men of rank in particular, who, following the honourable example of their forefathers, continued to cultivate the arts and sciences, seem to have regarded Gongorism as the only style that was truly gentlemanly and worthy of their adoption. Accordingly Eugenio Gerardo Lobo, who was a captain in the Spanish guards, and commandant of the town and fortress of Barcelona, composed in his leisure hours, many spiritual and temporal poems in the manner of the Gongorists, which, since the author’s decease, have been reprinted.581 A new edition of these poems, which appeared in 1758, is inscribed by the publisher to a miraculous image of the virgin, with all the usual formality of a dedicatory epistle. In this dedication the holy virgin, in quality of queen of heaven, is addressed by the title of “Your Majesty.” Thus in the middle of the eighteenth century, when an elegant and learned party had long rendered homage to French literature, the taste of the Spanish public could still endure absurdities of this kind.
DIFFUSION OF THE FRENCH TASTE—LUZAN, HIS ART OF POETRY, &c.
It was, however, in the commencement of the eighteenth century that the French taste found its way into the Spanish academy; and this circumstance, which was not the effect of accident, serves to mark a kind of epoch in the history of Spanish poetry.
Ignacio de Luzan, who has become the authority to whom most Spanish critics refer, must be regarded as the founder of the French school in Spanish literature. He was a member of the royal Spanish academy, a member of the academy of history, an honorary member of the academy of painting, sculpture, and architecture; and at the same time counsellor of state and minister of commerce. In addition to these dignities, he was distinguished for extraordinary learning; and he was in particular very deeply versed in ancient literature. He studied with great assiduity Aristotle’s Art of Poetry and Rhetoric, and also the rhetorical works of Cicero. He was a lover of poetry, and composed very elegant verses in his native tongue. Being, as his writings sufficiently prove, a man of candid and enlightened mind, national pride did not deter him from making himself intimately acquainted with French literature; and comparing it without prejudice, under its best point of view, with the literature of his own country. This was certainly a course altogether new for a Spanish author.
In order to form a just estimate of the spirit of Luzan’s labours, it is necessary to bear in mind that the theoretical literature of Spain furnished him with scarcely a single trace of sound criticism; that even those Spanish poets who possessed the justest feeling for poetic beauty, propounded, in their theoretic explanations, the most erroneous notions on the value and the essence of poetry; that only a critical tact, and an instinctive imitation of good models, had preserved the most correct among the Spanish poets from wanderings of the imagination and perversions of judgment; and that in the age of Luzan, the only art of criticism which was theoretically taught in Spain, had issued from the school of Gongora, and was consequently only calculated to assist the systematic propagation of absurdity and affectation. Moreover, the elegant correctness of the French poets was, in that age, calculated to dazzle by the charm of novelty. Finally, the delicate subtleties whereby the principles of French criticism and of French poetry, since the age of Moliere and Corneille, were derived from the classic school of antiquity, and the moral syllogisms with which those principles were entrenched behind Aristotle’s Art of Poetry, as their last bulwark, were well calculated to seduce a man of Luzan’s erudition. His partiality for the French school, and his efforts to reform the Spanish taste according to the principles of that school, are therefore no proofs of narrowness of mind, though genuine poetic feeling certainly was not within the sphere of his talent. He possessed a delicate sense for elegance and the dress of poetry, but not for the energy and loftiness of poetic genius. It is thus easy to account for his having, with the best intentions, theoretically misunderstood the essence and design of poetry; and for his also having, in conformity with the spirit of French criticism, confounded the objects of the poet with the duties of the orator and the moralist.
It was then with the view of fundamentally reforming the literary taste of his countrymen, that Luzan wrote his celebrated Art of Poetry. It was first published at Saragossa in the year 1737, in a folio volume containing five hundred and three pages;582 and it has ever since been the code to which Spanish critics and authors have referred for the decision of all cases of doubt. Sound judgment and classic erudition are the chief characteristics of the work. The diction too is simple and elegant, and prolixity is avoided, though in order to attain that degree of perspicuity which was necessary for subduing Spanish prejudice, much detail was indispensable. Newly discovered truths must not be looked for in Luzan’s Art of Poetry. He even claims credit for the doctrines he developes on account of their venerable antiquity. His theory is declared by himself to be in the main no other than that of Aristotle, the greatest of philosophers. To the neglect of that theory he attributes the multitude of monstrous excrescences by which Spanish literature is disfigured. He therefore conceived he was rendering, though at the risk of being reproached with pedantary,583 an important service to the literature of his country, by the restoration and just application of those ancient and only true principles which had long been acknowledged and valued by the critics of foreign nations. In support of his doctrines, Luzan regards the critical observations of various French writers, particularly Rapin, Corneille, Crousaz, Lamy, and Madame Dacier, as next in authority to the works of Aristotle. He also availed himself of the Italian works of Gravina and Muratori. These, and other foreign authors, are quoted by name. Spanish readers must, doubtless, have been not a little surprised to find among the quotations passages from French authors, given in the French language, under the Spanish text. This was an unexampled phænomenon in Spanish literature; and though a trifling circumstance it serves to prove the increasing influence of the French language in Spain.
The want of novelty in the principles of Luzan’s Art of Poetry, is compensated by the new application of those principles to Spanish literature. The arrangement of the theory, which was introduced, also belongs, at least in part, to himself; and in the developement of that theory it is easy to recognize the man of judgment, and the perfect master of his subject, though he only improved what had been previously produced. The work is divided into four parts or books. The first developes, according to the notions of the author, the origin, progress, and essence of poetry, (el origen, progressos y essencia de la poesia.) The second book explains the usefulness and pleasure of poetry, (utilidad y deleyte de la poesia.) The third book treats, at ample length, of tragedy, comedy, and other kinds of dramatic composition; and the fourth of epic poetry. These chief divisions present, indeed, only the outline of Aristotle’s Art of Poetry; and Luzan’s work, can no more than its prototype, be regarded as a complete theory of the poetic art. In this respect Luzan went no further than his predecessor, Lopez Pinciano, who had long before equally clearly perceived that the work, called Aristotle’s Art of Poetry, was, in fact, merely a fragment.584 It is singular enough that Luzan takes no notice of Pinciano’s remarkable work; but whether he was unacquainted with it, or whether he was intentionally silent, cannot now be known. Within the boundaries of his four unsystematic divisions, Luzan pursues his own course; but the present is not the proper occasion for accompanying him step by step. As, however, the publication of Luzan’s book has been attended by important consequences, it will be proper to explain the manner in which this critic understood the principles of Aristotle, and how he applied them to Spanish literature.
Luzan in his exposition and application of Aristotle’s theory, takes his departure from the same false principle which misled all the French critics in the age of Louis XIV. He views poetry closely and directly on its moral side; but not in that comprehensive manner in which every thing, when contemplated on its moral side, ought to be examined; he regards it merely as an art destined to aid morality, properly so called; and that aid appears to him the more easily given, because he adopts the maxim that the object of poetry is to be at once useful and agreeable.585 Deceived by this gothic idea, which seems to have been founded on the misunderstanding of a verse of Horace, and which is certainly as old as modern literature, it became impossible for him either to attain a just notion of the poetic workings of the imagination, in relation to the beautiful, or to discover the truth of the proposition that such employment of the imagination possesses in itself, under the proper restrictions, a moral value, and ennobles human existence. Having fallen into the common error, Luzan, like the French poets and critics, was capable of taking only a very contracted view of poetic beauty. Genuine simplicity and elegance, and in both a delicate infusion of wit, formed with Luzan, as with the French poets and critics, the summary of all poetic excellence. According to these principles, the imagination was regarded as merely the handmaid of the recreative wit and the moralizing judgment. Genius was to be tied down by rules in conformity with these narrow ideas of the spirit and object of poetry. To satisfy the taste, in the exercise of wit and judgment, was regarded as the highest object of the poet’s efforts. The bold flight to a freer and fairer world, whence the true poet derives the spirit of his imaginings, in the imitation of nature, was deemed merely an agreeable accessary. In a word, the genuine essence of poetry was held to be an adventitious ornament, while its station was usurped by mere natural sentiment, and elegant or ingenious simplicity.
The useful and the agreeable, in the trivial signification of the terms, are therefore the verbal pivots around which Luzan’s whole poetic theory turns. It is easy to conceive what degree of excellence and truth was to be derived from such principles in their application to Spanish literature. Luzan zealously supported the cause of good taste against the absurdities of the Gongorists.586 He exposed, without reserve, the weak side of Lope de Vega’s poetry; and the examples he selects from the works of that poet, in order to shew how far they are at variance with nature and reason, prove precisely what they are intended to prove. But to admire genius in its wanderings, and even in many cases to prize those wanderings more than a frigid elegance, required a view of the subject which Luzan’s mind did not embrace. He was precisely the man to detect and enumerate the errors of the favourite poetry of his country; but he wanted the critical eye which would have enabled him to do justice to its beauties. After defining poetry to be an “imitation of nature, either general or particular, made in verse, for utility or amusement, or for both together,”587 he goes on to say, that little plays of wit, such as sonnets, madrigals, and songs, may sometimes have no other object than agreeable amusement; but that in poetry of a more important kind, such as comedies, tragedies, and epopee, the useful and the agreeable must necessarily be combined together, that is to say, the work must at once instruct and entertain. Accordingly, when he comes to treat more particularly of dramatic poetry, he says, “tragedy is such an imitation of an action as is calculated to correct fear, pity, or other passions; but a comedy must be an action so represented as to inspire love of some virtue, or hatred and abhorrence of some vice or fault.”588 It is not necessary to particularize the judgments which a critic, armed with these opinions, must have pronounced on the Spanish drama. Luzan not only blamed the Spanish dramatists for the violation of the Aristotelian unities, on the ground that such violation was contrary to nature; but he even condemned as not moral, or at least not sufficiently moral, the genuine nature which he could not avoid recognizing in their works. He, however says, that what is first to be esteemed in the Spanish dramatists, “is in general their ingenious invention, their extraordinary wit and judgment, admirable and essential qualities in great poets. Lope de Vega merits particular praise for the natural facility of his style, and the adroit way in which he has in many of his comedies painted the customs and the character of certain persons. I admire in Calderon the dignity of his language, which without ever being obscure or affected is always elegant.”589 He proceeds to eulogize the art of ingenious developement displayed in Calderon’s dramas of intrigue; and attributes a similar merit to some of the comedies of Antonio de Solis and Moretto. Under the same point of view he judges the writings of the later Spanish dramatists, on which he confers particular commendation on account of their superior regularity.590 Next follows a list of the faults, which, according to the above principles, he imputes to the Spanish drama in general, and to the favourite dramatic poets of the Spanish public in particular; and on this subject he makes many just observations. He had good reasons for not venturing to attack the Spanish Autos. He accordingly dismisses them very briefly, pronouncing no literary judgment on them, and merely observes that they are allegorical representations in honour of “the most holy sacrament of the altar.”
Thus did a critic, whose voice a century earlier would scarcely have been heard, systematically undertake to reform Spanish taste. It appears from Luzan’s introductory observations that he was either not sufficiently acquainted with the history of the poetry of his nation, or had forgotten most essential facts, otherwise he never could have adopted the notion that Spanish taste had degenerated for want of learned critics to open the eyes of the public. The Spaniards of Luzan’s age paid no more attention to his Art of Poetry, than their ancestors had bestowed on Lopez Pinciano’s, which inculcated the same principles two hundred years earlier, when the Spanish drama was in its infancy. But the members of the Spanish academy regarded Luzan’s book with as much veneration, as if through it the light of pure taste had first been disclosed to Spain; and thus was the academy at length placed in conflict with the public it sought to improve. Whether all the members of that literary institution concurred in Luzan’s plans of critical reformation cannot now be known. This, however, is certain, that nothing was written in defence of the national style, either by an academician or by any other critic or amateur; and all the writers, who, since that period, have by means of critical treatises and new dramas, zealously laboured to improve the dramatic literature of Spain, according to French principles, have been members of the Spanish academy.
Luzan himself did his utmost to support his theory by some original poetic productions and translations from the French. He translated one of Lachausée’s comedies; but with what success it was represented on the Spanish stage is not mentioned. It was, however, followed by various translations of French dramas by other writers.
Luzan’s poetic compositions are certainly honourably distinguished by correctness, facility and elegance, and by what may be termed the poetry of language, from the works of the Gongorists which at that time were not entirely exploded in Spain. They consist of occasional poems and poetic trifles, such as might have been written without the aid of genius by any man of cultivated mind, possessing a certain degree of descriptive talent. Zealous Gallicist as Luzan was, he had too much solidity of taste to attempt an imitation of the structure of French verse in the Spanish language; and accordingly his contributions to the poetic literature of his country are in the usual national metres. A poem in octaves, which he read on the opening of the academy of painting, sculpture and architecture, in 1752, fifteen years before the publication of his Art of Poetry, received particular approbation. He read poetic compositions of the same kind on several occasions. Some of his odes and canciones were not published till after his decease; among the number are two on the re-taking of the Fortress of Oran;591 an occasional poem, entitled, the Judgment of Paris, which is prettily conceived, and elegantly executed;592 and some poems imitated from the Greek of Anacreon and Sappho.593 Luzan died in the year 1754.
MAYANS Y SISCAR—BLAS NASSARE.
Among the contemporaries of Luzan, the royal librarian, Gregorio Mayans y Siscar, is entitled to praise, for having, in biographical, literary and rhetorical works, furnished many hints and notices which throw light on the history of Spanish poetry and eloquence. His collection of detached writings on the History of the Spanish Language, (Origenes de la Lengua Española), embraces more than the title promises; and among other things contains a well written discourse exhorting authors to pursue the true idea of Spanish eloquence.594 But his diffuse Art of Rhetoric,595 which he published twenty years later than the work last mentioned, is merely a formal compilation of the ideas and criticisms of Aristotle and modern writers. It might with equal propriety be entitled an art of poetry. The examples given from the poets are long and numerous.
Blas Antonio Nassare, prelate and academician, laboured to attain the same kind of merit. He was, however, so blinded by his predilection for French literature, that he considered the eight comedies of Cervantes, which he first restored to light, as parodies on the style of Lope de Vega.596
MONTIANO’S TRAGEDIES IN THE FRENCH STYLE.
Agustin de Montiano y Luyando, who was counsellor of state, director of the academy of history, and a member of the Spanish academy, undertook to introduce regular tragedy on the Spanish stage according to Luzan’s principles. With this view he wrote two tragedies, the one entitled Virginia, and the other Ataulpho, in which, with the exception of the rhymeless iambics, which he substituted for the French Alexandrines, he has most anxiously endeavoured to fulfil all the conditions required by French criticism.597 Both these tragedies are remarkable for pure and correct language; for the cautious avoidance of false metaphor; and for a certain natural style of expression, which is sometimes wanting even in the dramas of Corneille and Racine. They are, however, formed on the French model with such scrupulous nicety that they might be mistaken for translations.598 It is scarcely necessary to mention, that in these tragedies the Aristotelian unities are rigidly observed, and that in the Virginia the father does not stab his daughter on the stage.
To the play of Virginia which was published in 1750, some years before Ataulpho, Montiano annexed a historical critical treatise on Spanish tragedy.599 Patriotism had certainly some share in this treatise; for in the first place, Montiano wished historically to defend his countrymen against the reproach that no Spanish tragedy had ever been written; and secondly, he wished in his Virginia to furnish the first experiment of a Spanish tragedy, without violation of dramatic rules, though he did not pretend to set up that specimen as a model. He states, with all due modesty, that his work cost him much labour, and expresses a hope that his countrymen will be induced to imitate his example, to disregard the approbation of the ignorant multitude, and to strive to do better than he had done.600 In a preface to his tragedy of Ataulpho he enlarges on the same theme.
VELASQUEZ.
Among the number of the Spanish Gallicists must likewise be included that intelligent writer Luis Joseph de Velasquez. His History of Spanish Poetry, (Origenes de la Poesia Española), which was published in 1754, proves that the Spaniards had then, in a great measure, forgotten their national literature. Velasquez unquestionably took considerable pains to collect, with critical spirit, those facts which were probably better known to him than to any of his contemporaries; and yet he has, upon the whole, obscured rather than elucidated the history of Spanish poetry. His criticism is quite in the French style, with a slight tincture of Spanish patriotism. Velasquez was a member of the French academy of inscriptions and belles lettres.
Not a single Spanish poet of distinguished merit flourished during the first half of the eighteenth century. That such a barrenness should have succeeded so great a fertility of talent, is a circumstance which the exhaustion of the national spirit does not sufficiently explain. It is also necessary to take into the account the conflict maintained between favour shewn to the French style and the demands of the Spanish public. Supported by national approbation, the Spanish poetry had gloriously flourished; but it perished when new arbiters of taste, who judged according to foreign principles, could with impunity treat the Spanish public as an ignorant multitude.601 In this collision Spanish eloquence sustained no immediate injury. The influence of the French style, could indeed at that time do it no injury, for at the commencement of the eighteenth century, French prose was fitted to serve as a model for clearness, precision, facility and elegance. But no aspiring spirit now animated Spanish authors. Books written in correct prose were produced in sufficient numbers; and yet no work appeared which deserved particular distinction for rhetorical merit, or which contributed in any degree to invigorate the literature of Spain.
CHAPTER III.
CONCLUDING PERIOD OF THE HISTORY OF SPANISH POETRY AND ELOQUENCE.
The Spanish writers who lived about the middle of the eighteenth century, began to be ashamed of the unworthy bondage which had severed them from all common feeling with the public taste. It is doubtful whether at this particular period, the nation in general began once more to be roused to a sense of its own importance; but this is certain, that a literary patriotism imperceptibly revived within the narrow circle of Spanish authorship. Even several members of the Spanish academy proved that they were no longer to be satisfied with mere French elegance. The works of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries were again received into favour. Men of superior talents arose, who endeavoured to combine Spanish genius with French elegance; and the literature of Spain began to acquire a new life.
LA HUERTA.
One of the first who openly attacked the party of the Gallicists, was the patriotic Vicente Garcia de la Huerta, a member of the Spanish academy, and librarian to the king. None but a man whose literary judgments were accredited by the same honourable posts which gave peculiar weight to those of the Gallicists, could at that time hope to oppose with success the fashionable opinion concerning Spanish literature. La Huerta, however, undertook a dangerous task, for with every talent and right feeling for genuine poetry, he was by no means a skilful critic. In systematic coolness of judgment he was incompetent to enter the lists with men of Luzan’s critical ability. The true principles on which Spanish poetry was to be defended against French criticism, were at that period not at all understood; and La Huerta was not the man to discover them. But his feeling acted in the place of his judgment. It groped on when abandoned by theory, and rejected every theory to which it could not be reconciled. Conscious of his deficiency, La Huerta was extremely diffident whenever his opinions came into collision with those of Luzan and other academicians. But when his task was to reply to the observations of French critics, his patriotic enthusiasm knew no bounds. In exercising the law of retaliation, he attacked the admired Coryphæi of the French Parnassus with a grossness which would cast a stigma on his reputation for taste, did not his other works sufficiently prove him to have been unjust, only through the excess of a just indignation. Fortunately for La Huerta, it was not until his works had obtained decided credit that he openly avowed his hostility to the Gallicists. Among the poems which first conferred celebrity on his name, is a piscatory eclogue, which he read at a distribution of academic prizes in the year 1760. This purely occasional effusion is written in the national lyric style of the eclogues of the best period of Spanish poetry, and is free from orientalisms.602 Three years afterwards, on a similar occasion, he read a mythological poem in stanzas. These were succeeded by other poems, also of occasional origin, by which La Huerta disarmed the critics, who might have been disposed to assert that he was destitute of the necessary feeling for French elegance. The romances by which he sought to give to that style of national poetry a new existence in the elegant world, seem to have been written at various periods of his life. Besides lyric romances, which had not entirely lost their ancient consideration, he composed narrative romances in the old style. In one of the latter compositions his success is remarkable.603 He likewise revived the Spanish custom of composing poetic glosses; and some of his sonnets deserve the highest praise. That he was well acquainted with latin and French poetry is evident from his metrical translations of some of Horace’s odes, and of several fragments from the works of the French poets.604
But he had greater difficulties to overcome in his endeavours to restore the Spanish drama to its former lustre. He was not so great a poet as to be able to advance, accompanied by French elegance, in the same course in which Calderon had stopped. Calderon’s dramas were, however, still performed with approbation, in spite of all that was said by the critics, and La Huerta wrote for one of these pieces a prologue (loa) in the old style. At length when he thought he could rely on the favour of a certain portion of the public, he came forward with his first essay in tragic art. His Raquel, (Rachel), a tragedy, which was intended to combine the old Spanish forms with the dignity of the French tragic style, without being subject to the French rules of dramatic art, was first performed at the court theatre of Madrid in 1778. For upwards of half a century no new drama had been received with such enthusiasm by the Spanish public. It was represented at every theatre in Spain; and even before it was printed upwards of two thousand copies were taken, and many sent as far as America.605 The Gallicists in Spain now rose in opposition to La Huerta; but he replied to them in a tone of contemptuous haughtiness, while he always observed the strictest modesty in addressing the public.
La Huerta’s Rachel is not a master-piece; but it is a noble testimony of the poetic national feeling of an ingenious writer, who exerted his utmost endeavours to restore the credit of the Spanish drama. The subject is taken from the old history of Castile. King Alphonso VIII. who has resigned his heart and his royal dignity to the fair Jewess Rachel, is implored by the people and the nobility to shake off the dishonourable yoke. He hesitates between love and duty, until the spirit of discontent, which has been with difficulty repressed, breaks forth in rebellion. While the king is out hunting, Rachel is surprised in the palace, and her base counsellor, Ruben, murders her to save his own life; which he only preserves until the arrival of the king, by whom he is killed in return. The tragedy is divided, according to the old practice, into three jornadas; but, in other respects, it is obvious that the author took considerable pains to conform, under certain limitations, to the French rules of dramatic art. The dialogue proceeds uniformly in iambic blank verse, without the introduction of sonnets, or any other kind of metre. All irregular theatrical pageantry is avoided. The language, upon the whole, preserves a dignified character; and in several scenes the tragic pathos is complete.606 But the composition fails in the distribution of the characters. Only a feeble light is thrown on Rachel, the heroine of the tragedy. Her counsellor, Ruben, is a stupid contemptible Jew, whose lamentations in the moment of danger border closely on the ludicrous;607 and the weak character of the king, who changes his resolutions on every new impression, frequently approaches caricature. The author has, however, succeeded admirably in exhibiting a striking contrast in the characters of two Spanish grandees:—the one is a base courtier, named Manrique; while the other, Garcia de Castro, in all his sentiments and actions is a correct representative of the spirit of ancient Spanish chivalry in its purest dignity. In the patriotic portraiture of this character, La Huerta’s whole soul is developed;608 and the national spirit which pervades the tragedy, doubtless contributed in no small degree to ensure its celebrity.
La Huerta’s tragedy of Agamemnon Vengado, is a work of trivial importance compared with Rachel. It is founded on the prose translation of the Electra of Sophocles, which Perez de Oliva produced two hundred years earlier;609 but it is a remarkable, and by no means unsuccessful attempt to unite the romantic and the classic forms, according to the conditions required by a modern audience. La Huerta wrote his Agamemnon in compliance with the wishes of some ladies of Madrid, who were desirous of seeing a tragedy in the Grecian costume. The place of the chorus is, after the French manner, supplied by a female confidante. Part of the scenes are entirely taken from Sophocles, others are those of the original remoulded, and some are new. From the beginning to the end of the tragedy, the poetic language is admirably preserved; and the alternation of the rhymeless iambics with octaves and lyric metres, completes the beauty of the whole.610
Finally, La Huerta adapted Voltaire’s Zaire to the Spanish stage. After he had unquestionably acquired the right of pronouncing a decided opinion on the literature of his country, he published his Theatro Hespañol; and in his prefaces to some of the volumes of that collection, he launched forth his invectives against the French drama.611 La Huerta’s Theatro Hespañol is a classic selection from the incalculable store of Spanish dramas; and the selection is certainly well made consistently with the plan which he had adopted. With the view of marking his hostility towards the Gallicists, he selected only those Spanish comedies which are particularly distinguished for elegant ingenuity in point of invention and execution. Thus upwards of three-fourths of the whole collection consists of comedias de capa y espada, chiefly from the pen of Calderon. But for this very reason the work does not properly fulfil its title, as it exhibits the Spanish theatre only under one point of view. La Huerta has not even selected a single piece from Lope de Vega, because the plays of that great dramatist were not sufficiently elegant for his purpose: neither has he granted a place to the most beautiful of Calderon’s heroic comedies, being deterred from inserting them by their irregularity; and in conformity with the plan he had laid down, he could with still less propriety admit an Auto into his collection. By this work he, however, attained the objects he had in view, which were to restore the Spanish national comedy to its honourable place in literature, and to vent his feelings of indignation against the Gallicists. He treats the Italian authors, who had openly avowed their disapproval of the Spanish drama, with no less severity than he had evinced towards the French critics. Quadrio, Tiraboschi, Bettinelli, and other writers “of the same breed,” (de la misma raza), are denounced by La Huerta as malignant and envious critics. He accuses Signorelli, of “notorious falsehood.” “Childish egotism,” he says, is the soul of French criticism. The icy coldness of French tragedy was with him more offensive than the neglect of rules in the Spanish drama. Racine, the favourite tragic writer of the French school, owed his fame solely to the “tedious scrupulosity,” which he observed in composing his tragedies, but not to the “masculine vigour of genius, or the fire and spirit of fancy.” The “natural sublimity” of Spanish genius could not be restrained by the fetters of the French school. Luzan, though in many respects a very estimable author, was imbued with prejudices. Velasquez, with all his delicacy and erudition had fallen into the errors and misconceptions of Luzan. In general, Spanish poetry had, like the Spanish nation, a certain oriental character, which it was fit it should preserve. French imitations of Spanish dramas of intrigue are declared perfectly insupportable; and, in particular, the Marriage of Figaro, “a comedy altogether contemptible,” (despreciada en todas sus partes.612)
La Huerta remained a debtor to the public for the critical grounds of these denunciations, which called forth the bitterest answers from the adverse party, and also for a reply to his opponents. He asserted briefly and bluntly that those opponents were merely “a ludicrous pack of cynical and drivelling critics, the vehicles of envy, ignorance, and imbecility.” What might not this patriotic author have effected had he been as energetic in his reasoning as in his abuse! He nevertheless appears to have contributed more than any of his contemporaries to produce a re-action in Spanish literature, which was indispensable to give to that literature the opportunity of again acquiring a poetic elevation.
SEDANO.
The publication of the choice Spanish poems, collected by Don Juan Joseph Lopez de Sedano, was a circumstance very favourable to the restoration of the poetry of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries to its proper place in Spanish literature. This work appeared in the year 1768, under the title of the Parnaso Español; but there certainly would have been little difficulty in producing a better collection. The notions which Sedano entertained respecting religion and morality have induced him to mingle not a few bad and indifferent productions with poems of superior merit; and it was by no means a happy idea to reprint long translations, such, for example, as the whole of Tasso’s Amynta, when so much of the rich fruit of the original Spanish stock remained ungathered. But the undertaking was praiseworthy; and the biographical and literary notices annexed to the work rendered the Spanish public once more acquainted with estimable authors whom it ought never to have forgotten.
YRIARTE.
Tomas de Yriarte, general archivist to the high council of war, and translator to one of the ministerial departments of state in Madrid, combined French elegance with the ancient forms of Spanish poetry in a manner very different from that of La Huerta. After he had acquired a certain degree of reputation by several translations of French dramas, by original poems in the latin language, and various other literary labours, he obtained more decidedly the favour of the elegant portion of the Spanish public by his Fabulas Literarias, (Literary Fables), which were first printed in the year 1782.613 Yriarte conceived the novel idea of rendering literary truths, many of which may at the same time be regarded as moral truths, themes for fables in the style of Æsop; and of composing these fables in every variety of verse which was in any way applicable to them. No classical fabulist had hitherto appeared in Spanish literature. Yriarte’s fables are, however, not only remarkable for their classic language and excellent versification, but they possess a peculiar charm of style which may be mistaken for a happy imitation of the manner of Lafontaine, though it is to be traced to a different source. Like Lafontaine, Yriarte had a true feeling for that delicate harmony which is so indispensable to the fabulist, and for that spirited infantine style, which, in a graceful prattling, playfully unfolds the truth as it were intuitively, and, as it ought always to be disclosed, in apologue, without the slightest trace of didactic design. He had no need to turn to the writings of foreigners in quest of the literary elements of such a style. It was only necessary to combine the exquisite simplicity of many old Spanish romances and songs, with the true spirit of Æsopian fable, and his narrative style could not fail to assume the tone in which it so successfully rivalled the manner of Lafontaine. Accordingly among Yriarte’s sixty-seven literary fables, those which are composed in redondillas and other kinds of Spanish national measures, possess the superiority in point of graceful execution. Some are not remarkable for their didactic merits. But even when the idea, or what is styled the moral, presents no particular interest, Yriarte’s fables please by the graceful handling of the subject: an example of this may be seen in the fable of the Ass, which finding a flute in a meadow, accidentally breathes into the lip-hole with his nose, and on hearing the tone of the instrument, persuades himself that nature has qualified him for a musician.614 Whether Yriarte wholly invented these fables, is a question which can only be decided by laborious investigation. One of the number, in so far as regards the lesson or moral, precisely resembles Gellert’s fable of the Painter in Athens.615 Yet this circumstance by no means warrants the inference that it is borrowed.
Considerable praise has been bestowed on a didactic poem by Yriarte, entitled Music;616 but with all the merits which this production may in other respects possess, it is no less deficient in the true characteristics of a didactic poem, than are the earlier essays of the Spaniards in the same class. It is judiciously conceived, executed with the requisite elegance of language, and contains many passages which are by no means destitute of poetic beauty.617 But the systematic form is not disguised by poetic composition. Instead of diffusing a poetic interest over the truths which were to be inculcated, and presenting even the instruction as a picture of the imagination, according to the proper though seldom realized idea of a didactic poem, Yriarte, like most didactic poets, regarded instruction as the main object, and the creations of poetic fancy merely as accessory embellishments: thus three-fourths of his work consist only of elegantly versified prose.618